STAR TEX,TIRUPUR V. ITO , WARD-1(2), TIRUPUR

ITA 1914/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Star Tex, represented by the legal representative and wife of one of the partners, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC)/CIT(A) dated 29/11/2024 for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The appeal was initially delayed by 154 days due to the death of a partner, which was later condoned by the ITAT. The primary contention was that the assessee was not provided a reasonable opportunity of being heard at both the assessment and the first appellate stages, leading to an ex parte order by the CIT(A). The ITAT, considering the circumstances and the principles of natural justice, restored the matter to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 773927 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 04-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ \u0010ा यपीठ चे\u0015ई म\u0018। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1914/Chny/2025 (Assessment Year 2018-19) Star Tex, Represented by the wife and L/R of one of the partners, No. 9, Poonthottam Murungapalayam Gandhi Nagar Post, Opp Saran Theatre, Tirupur-641603 (Tamil Nadu) PAN No. ACXFS 8740 C Vs. I.T.O., Ward 1(2), Tirupur. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee represented by Shri S. Bhupendran, Advocate. Department represented by Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT. Date of hearing 16/09/2025 Date of pronouncement 26/09/2025 PER: RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] dated 29/11/2024 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19 as per ground of appeal on record. 2. At the outset of hearing, we found from perusal of record that there is delay of 154 days in filing this appeal before this Tribunal for which, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay in the form of affidavit mentioning the fact that the partner of the assessee firm had passed away and the legal representative and wife of one of the partners of the firm came to know about Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA1914/Chny/2025 Star Tex Vs ITO the proceedings only later, hence, there is delay in filing the appeal. The assessee stated that the delay is not intentional and deliberate, the same was due to situation beyond thier control. He has good case on merit and is likely to succeed, if one more opportunity is provided to the assessee. The assessee prayed to condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. On the other hand, the ld. Sr.DR for the revenue on the application of condonation of delay, submitted that the Bench may take appropriate view as per law. 4. We have considered the rival submissions. On the issue of condonation of delay, we find that the assessee submitted in its affidavit and due to death of partners of the assessee firm, delay was occurred in filing the appeal. The delay was no inordinate, thus, we condone the delay of 154 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal and admit the same for hearing. 5. On merit of the case, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer passed assessment order under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) by not providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Assessing Officer made addition under Section 69A amounting to Rs. 1,36,42,687/-. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the ld. CIT(A) also not provided reasonable and adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee and passed the impugned order ex parte. The ld. AR prayed to restore the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for deciding the same afresh after providing a reasonable and effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA1914/Chny/2025 Star Tex Vs ITO 6. On the other hand, the ld. Sr.DR for the revenue has vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that the assessee has not appeared nor filed any submissions before both the lower authorities, hence, the assessee does not deserve any leniency at this stage. 7. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the Assessing Officer has passed assessment order on 14/02/2024 by making addition of Rs. 1,36,42,687/- made under Section 69A of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) also dismissed the appeal by passing ex parte order. Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee prayed to restore the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A), therefore, considering the prayer of the assessee and in the interest of justice, we restore the issue back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication with the undertaking of the ld.AR of the assessee that they will make necessary compliance before the ld. CIT(A) and provide all necessary documents to substantiate the transactions on record. Before deciding the issue, the assessee shall provide reasonable and adequate opportunity of hearing. In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only. 8. In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 26/09/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (SS VISWANETHRA RAVI) (RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Chennai, Dated: 26/09/2025 *Ranjan Copy to: 1. Assessee 2. Revenue Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA1914/Chny/2025 Star Tex Vs ITO 3. CIT 4. DR 5. Guard File By order Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Chennai Printed from counselvise.com "